Not at all: Coherency in the sense of de Finetti, regarding
reasonably complex everyday situations, is out of reach for humans as
well as for modest-resources AGIs...
The dramatic probabilistic incoherency of humans is demonstrated by
human behavior in casinos. But, even if AGIs aren't that stupid,
they won't be able to achieve complete probabilistic coherence on
complex domains.
-- Ben
On Feb 7, 2007, at 10:44 AM, gts wrote:
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:02:11 -0500, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Consistency in the sense of de Finetti or Cox is out of reach for
a modest-resources AGI, in principle...
Sorry to be the one to break the news...
You used the word "consistency" instead of the word "coherency"
that I was using, but assuming you mean them as synonyms, and
assuming you're correct, then I think that really is terrible news
for AGI and I wonder why you're even bothering with it.
Coherency in the De Finetti sense is not very much different from
coherency as the word is used in normal conversation, as when
evaluating the words and mental states of people. Incoherent people
are in worse shape than stupid. We put incoherent people in
psychiatric facilities.
-gts
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
